Table 3. Some systematic review methodological considerations specific to review of consumer health videos, with examples.
| Characteristic | Examples |
|---|---|
| Whether the search was intended to identify all consumer-oriented videos or a sample | We reviewed videos posting: on YouTube; on the web. |
| What video sources were selected | YouTube; Vimeo; Yahoo Video |
| How search terms were derived | Search terms were chosen; by the investigator; by soliciting suggestions from consumers; based by search log data such as Google Trends |
| Any system preferences that would have influenced the search results | What sort order was used; the search was limited to reviews classification as “educational”; the search was limited to recently added videos |
| How the review of the search results was conducted | Sequential screening of search results; snowballing |
| Discontinuation rules | Results were screened: until a predetermined sample size was obtained (state how the sample size was determined); until the entire search result was considered; until predetermined discontinuation criteria were met (state how that critera was determined). |
| How the instability of rankings was addressed | All screening done in a single day; Search results were captured for later assessment. |
| Any other measures designed to neutralize bias in the identification of videosa | We using a computer outside the institutional firewall and not previously used to search YouTube; We searched through DuckDuckGo.com to avoid having our location influence the ranking of videos. |
Notes.
a
Many search sites customize search results based on factors such as your geographic location and search history (Pariser, 2013).